Authors' objectives:

"The objective of this analysis is to perform a systematic review and economic evaluation of PGAs for the treatment of increased IOP, using evidence from published and unpublished randomized controlled trials (RCTs)." (executive summary)

Authors' recommendations: Implications for Decision Making Not all PGAs are the same. There is evidence that latanoprost and travoprost reduce IOP more effectively than timolol. The same evidence does not exist for bimatoprost. Timolol that is used as a first-line option could represent an optimal use of scarce resources. For appropriate patients, it would be preferable, from a cost-effectiveness standpoint, to start treatment with timolol and reserve the PGAs as an alternative treatment or as add-on therapy for patients not achieving a clinical response with timolol. PGAs may be cost-saving, depending on the alternative. Compared to dorzolamide, latanoprost is more effective and less costly. Compared to brimonidine, latanoprost is associated with additional costs, at a lower cost per mm Hg reduced. The long-term benefit from PGAs is unclear. There is no evidence that greater reductions in IOP translate into reductions in visits to a physician or surgical procedures, or an increase in health-related quality of life.

Authors' methods: Systematic review

Project Status: Completed

URL for project: http://www.cadth.ca/index.php/en/hta/reports-publications/search/publication/728

Year Published: 2007

English language abstract: An English language summary is available

Publication Type: Not Assigned

Country: Canada

Organisation Name: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health

Contact Address: 600-865 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, ON K1S 5S8 Canada. Tel: +1 613 226 2553; Fax: +1 613 226 5392;

Contact Name: requests@cadth.ca

Contact Email: requests@cadth.ca

Copyright: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH)